Van Dorn vs Romillo, 139 SCRA 139

-

 

Facts 

Alice Reyes Van Dorn, a Filipino citizen, and Richard Upton, an American citizen, were married in Hong Kong in 1972. They then settled in the Philippines and had two children. However, their relationship eventually deteriorated. In 1982, a divorce was obtained in Nevada, USA, legally dissolving their marriage. Alice later remarried in Nevada, this time to Theodore Van Dorn.

Despite the divorce, in 1983, Richard Upton filed a complaint before the Regional Trial Court of Pasay City, asserting that Alice’s business in Manila—The Galleon Shop—was conjugal property and that he was entitled to manage or receive a share of it. He asked the court to compel Alice to render an accounting of the said business.

Alice moved to dismiss the case. She argued that the Nevada divorce decree had already dissolved their marriage and that Richard himself acknowledged in that proceeding that there was no community property or obligations between them. She further asserted that as an American citizen, Richard was bound by the decree of his own country and was estopped from pursuing claims against her under Philippine law, especially as a husband.

The trial court denied her motion to dismiss, reasoning that Philippine laws do not recognize divorce, especially when applied to Filipino citizens, and that the property involved was located in the Philippines.

Alice filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition before the Supreme Court, assailing the denial of her motion to dismiss and the refusal to reconsider it.

Lower Court's Ruling

The RTC of Pasay City refused to dismiss the complaint. It held that despite the divorce decree from Nevada, Philippine laws govern the property relations of spouses over properties situated in the Philippines, and divorce has no effect here. Thus, the court treated Alice and Richard as still married under Philippine law, and the property in question was deemed potentially conjugal.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner (Alice Van Dorn):
She claimed that the Nevada court had jurisdiction over both parties in the divorce. Richard expressly declared there were no conjugal or community properties. As such, he should be estopped from now asserting any rights over her business. She emphasized that foreign divorces validly obtained by foreigners must be recognized in the Philippines, and the court should not entertain Richard’s complaint as he was no longer her husband.

Respondent (Richard Upton):
He argued that Philippine law does not recognize foreign divorce, especially in light of the nationality principle under Article 15 of the Civil Code. As long as Alice is a Filipino, Philippine law prohibits absolute divorce and their marriage should still be considered valid. Thus, he maintained that he had the right to assert control over the alleged conjugal property.

Supreme Court Decision

The Supreme Court granted the Petition and ordered the dismissal of the case.

It held that:

  • The Nevada divorce was valid and binding upon Richard Upton as a U.S. citizen. He authorized the divorce, accepted the jurisdiction of the Nevada court, and expressly admitted there was no community property or obligation between him and Alice. By the laws of his own country, he was no longer Alice’s husband.

  • Even though Philippine law does not recognize absolute divorce for Filipino citizens, the Court clarified that foreigners are not bound by this prohibition. Since Richard was a foreigner, the divorce was effective to dissolve the marital tie from his standpoint.

  • Therefore, Richard cannot assert rights as a husband under Philippine law—including claiming control over Alice’s property—because he is no longer her husband in the eyes of his own legal system, which dissolved the marriage.

  • To allow him to invoke Philippine laws regarding conjugal property would create unfairness and absurdity, as it would still obligate Alice to her former husband—a man who is no longer legally her spouse abroad, and who had even renounced any community property claims.

  • The Court emphasized that public policy should not be used to unjustly deny a Filipina the protection of her rights, particularly when the foreign spouse has already renounced the marital relationship and its legal effects.

Doctrine / Principles Applied

  • Nationality Principle (Article 15, Civil Code): Philippine citizens are bound by Philippine laws relating to family rights and duties, status, condition, and legal capacity. Foreigners are subject to the laws of their own country.

  • Recognition of Foreign Divorce: A foreign divorce obtained by a foreign national, if valid in his or her country, is recognized in the Philippines as it effectively severs the marriage tie from that foreign spouse's standpoint.

  • Estoppel in Foreign Divorce: A foreigner who voluntarily obtained a divorce abroad and made judicial admissions therein (such as absence of conjugal property) is estopped from asserting inconsistent claims in the Philippines based on the same marital relationship.

  • Public Policy Limits: Public policy, while significant, cannot be used to oppress or unfairly bind a Filipino spouse to an already-defunct marriage, especially when the foreign spouse has legally dissolved it under his national law.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I found a new house

-
July, 6, 2020 Today, After a week of finding a new house to rent, finally I found it, several people and checked their house to rent, and finally I hope that this one is that the Lord guided me here, I pay 8500 pesos for my deposit and advances, there will be some adjustment due to price of bill that I will pay monthly, but I chose this because I felt unsecured in my previous place, that place is price wise, because it only cost 2,200 pesos unlike this current house I am staying right now 4,250 a month exclusive electric and water bill to estimate it maybe I a lot 5 thousand pesos a month, that would be a great cut to my salary and savings, just to add up this one I found is not actually expensive it is just the previous house is just too cheap in this city, it is just there is an history of suicide and there is weird guys next to my room, so I think I should be thankful I somehow feel safe right now even I am still adjusting because I have another housemate but for my first impres...
Read more

In this world cruel world

-
In this world that the one who has money has the power, the man who has money has the influence, has the right over poor people. The person who has money has right to mock other people. In this world that man that has money can own a huge number of lot, huge number of house who they can investment. Slavery is still here, we are in 20th century, but power over man is still here, I am even talking about racism, it more than that because slavery is still here. Money can talk, money can buy every material thing in this world, and if you a poor person with no dignity, you can sell yourself bought by called money. If you do not own a house, you will call yourself a poor, and you are a poor dreaming to be rich someday, you have to walk through every obstacles you will face, and that is not going to be easy, because this is a cruel world. People with power know that you are striving to get out of mud, they know it, and not every rich person willing to help you with it, some of them w...
Read more

I told myself

-
June, 24, 2020 Still working on it, but I need to be consistent, Woah! just wrote my father's day letter day's ago, I was amazed to have 22 views, what I felt is a little happy because someone read my blog, supposedly it was for the purpose of practicing and memory of me writing and of course memory of my father, I wrote what I feel, I actually don't proof read my blog because I write it without thinking too much about grammar, but then when I saw that the views are increasing, I 've said I was insecure that maybe the reader will find many mistake in grammar, so I proof read it and did my best to reconstruct the paragraphs, since I was not fluent in english and likewise how I write stories and sentences, I can't sleep that night because I was also thinking how the reader will see me as person, but anyway, it is my life, and I learn that part of life is learning to accept what other people gonna say to you and face it without fear, because it is part of your progre...
Read more